atlas

Research map / Vision-language and multimodal / CLIP and zero-shot

Generalizable Whole Slide Image Classification with Fine-Grained Visual-Semantic Interaction

CVPR 2024 · Vision-language and multimodal › CLIP and zero-shot · approach: Open-vocabulary alignment from VLMs · 30 citations (OpenAlex)

Read the paperCheck your idea against 108,967 papers

AI-extracted summary. Written by AI from the paper's full text. Numbers and claims can be wrong or missing context, so check the paper before you cite or build on it.

Proposes FiVE, a WSI classification framework that trains a vision-language model on fine-grained, GPT-4-standardized pathology report descriptions using a TFS module with learnable diagnosis prompts and patch sampling.

Problem

WSI classification with vision-language models relies on coarse category-level text labels, which miss fine-grained pathological details and limit generalization; processing high-resolution WSIs is also computationally expensive.

Approach

Extract fine-grained diagnostic answers from non-standardized TCGA pathology reports via GPT-4 with expert-designed queries, recombine sampled answers into varied-granularity text labels, and align bag-level features (aggregated by a Task-specific Fine-grained Semantics module with learnable diagnosis prompts) with these labels; also sample a subset of patches during training.

Key results

Measured effects reported in the paper

What was changedWhereMeasuredEffect
Use FiVE instead of MHIM-MIL for slide classificationWSI classification · Camelyon16ACC: 92.48±0.35 -> 94.25±0.33Helped
Use FiVE instead of MHIM-MIL for slide classificationWSI classification · TCGA Lung CancerACC: 89.93±3.37 -> 94.62±2.13Helped
Use FiVE instead of TOPFew-shot WSI classification · TCGA Lung Cancer 1-shotaccuracy: 71.01 -> 83.91Helped
Use FiVE instead of TOPFew-shot WSI classification · TCGA Lung Cancer 16-shotaccuracy: 82.06 -> 91.25Helped
Pre-train FiVE on TCGA-LUAD fine-grained labels rather than use attention-poolingZero-shot subtype classification · TCGA-LUAD histological subtypesTop-1 accuracy: 58.36 -> 65.23Helped
Add fine-grained labels (ablation)FiVE · TCGA Lung CancerACC: 89.77 -> 91.21Helped
Add fine-grained guidance (ablation)FiVE with fine-grained labels · TCGA Lung CancerACC: 91.21 -> 93.56Helped
Add learnable diagnosis prompts (ablation)FiVE with fine-grained guidance · TCGA Lung CancerACC: 93.56 -> 94.62Helped
Sample a subset of visual instances during training (ablation)FiVE · WSI classificationaccuracyNo clear effect

Limitations

Experimental setup

Datasets: TCGA Lung Cancer Camelyon16 TCGA pathology reports cBioPortal LUAD histological subtype labels

Benchmarks: TCGA Lung Cancer Camelyon16 TCGA-LUAD histological subtypes

Metrics: ACC AUC F1-score top-1 accuracy top-5 accuracy

Baselines: ABMIL DSMIL CLAM-SB CLAM-MB TransMIL DTFD-MIL MHIM-MIL CoOp TOP Max-pooling Mean-pooling Attention-pooling

Builds on: CLIP CoOp LLaMA-Adapter FLIP MHIM-MIL

Closest papers by meaning

Writing a paper in this area? scime draft is a free LaTeX editor with AI included, real-time co-authors and a check of your references and venue rules before you submit. It also imports OpenAI Prism projects.

Open scime draft

Get the next scime Dispatch and a monthly field update

Free. We send a confirmation link first; every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Privacy